Literature DB >> 24901688

Laparoscopic colorectal resections: a simple predictor model and a stratification risk for conversion to open surgery.

Carlos A Vaccaro1, Gustavo L Rossi, Guillermo Ojea Quintana, Enrique R Soriano, Hernan Vaccarezza, Fernando Rubinstein.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The advantages associated with the laparoscopic approach are lost when conversion is required. Available predictive models have failed to show external validation. Body surface area is a recently described risk factor not included in these models.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a clinical rule including body surface area for predicting conversion in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study.
SETTING: This study was conducted at a single large tertiary care institution. PATIENTS: Nine hundred sixteen patients (mean age, 63.9; range, 14-91 years; 53.2% female) who underwent surgery between January 2004 and August 2011 were identified from a prospective database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Conversion rate was analyzed related to age, sex, obesity, disease location (colon vs rectum), type of disease (neoplastic vs nonneoplastic), history of previous surgery, and body surface area. A predictive model for conversion was developed with the use of logistic regression to identify independently associated variables, and a simple clinical prediction rule was derived. Internal validation of the model was performed by using bootstrapping.
RESULTS: The conversion rate was 9.9% (91/916). Rectal disease, large patient size, and male sex were independently associated with higher odds of conversion (OR, 2.28 95%CI, 1.47-3.46]), 1.88 [1.1-3.44], and 1.87 [1.04-3.24]). The prediction rule identified 3 risk groups: low risk (women and nonlarge males), average risk (large males with colon disease), and high risk (large males with rectal disease). Conversion rates among these groups were 5.7%, 11.3%, and 27.8% (p < 0.001). Compared with the low-risk group, ORs for average- and high-risk groups were 2.17 (1.30-3.62, p = 0.004) and 6.38 (3.57-11.4, p < 0.0001). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by the lack of external validation.
CONCLUSION: This predictive model, including body surface area, stratifies patients with different conversion risks and may help to inform patients, to select cases in the early learning curve, and to evaluate the standard of care. However, this prediction rule needs to be externally validated in other samples (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A137).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24901688     DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000137

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  15 in total

1.  Emergent Laparoscopic Colectomy Is an Effective Alternative to Open Resection for Benign and Malignant Diseases: a Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Sun-Bing Xu; Zhong Jia; Yi-Ping Zhu; Ren-Chao Zhang; Ping Wang
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 0.656

2.  Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients with previous abdominal surgery: A systematic review.

Authors:  Marleny Novaes Figueiredo; Fabio Guilherme Campos; Luiz Augusto D'Albuquerque; Sergio Carlos Nahas; Ivan Cecconello; Yves Panis
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-07-27

3.  Single-port endoscopic mesocolic and mesorectal excision using an extraperitoneal approach.

Authors:  F Dumont; E Thibaudeau; L Benhaïm; S Gouy; D Labbe; C Honoré; D Goéré
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic colectomy surgery in obese patients: a case-matched study.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; Sergio Ibarra; Juan Ramon Flores-Gonzalez; Oscar Moreno Ponte; Nisreen Madhoun; T Bartley Pickron; Eric M Haas
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-06-20       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  The robotic approach significantly reduces length of stay after colectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Ahmed M Al-Mazrou; Codruta Chiuzan; Ravi P Kiran
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Right versus left laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer: does side make any difference?

Authors:  Juan P Campana; Pablo A Pellegrini; Gustavo L Rossi; Guillermo Ojea Quintana; Ricardo E Mentz; Carlos A Vaccaro
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Abdominal fat ratio - a novel parameter for predicting conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  S I Scott; S Farid; C Mann; R Jones; P Kang; J Evans
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  Effect of BMI on Short-Term Outcomes with Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery: a Case-Matched Study.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; Nisreen Madhoun; Juan Ramon Flores-Gonzalez; Sergio Ibarra; Reena Tahilramani; Eric M Haas
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Analysis of Early and Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes After Converted Laparoscopic Resection Compared to Primary Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Marco Ettore Allaix; Edgar Furnée; Laura Esposito; Massimiliano Mistrangelo; Fabrizio Rebecchi; Alberto Arezzo; Mario Morino
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Geographic variation in use of laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer.

Authors:  Bradley N Reames; Kyle H Sheetz; Seth A Waits; Justin B Dimick; Scott E Regenbogen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-10-06       Impact factor: 44.544

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.